Mr. Jules, the floor is yours.
Evidence of meeting #13 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was communities.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #13 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was communities.
A recording is available from Parliament.
2:35 p.m.
C.T. (Manny) Jules
It's very clear that the institutional framework we've developed through optional legislation absolutely works. It was proven by the example that MP Cathy McLeod just raised.
The band was able to utilize the tools under the FMA to get development cost charges, put aside “x” amount of dollars on an annual basis and create an incredible water system that will expand the industrial and commercial development lands on our reserve and provide better water quality.
What you see happening right across the country is that the federal government, through its regulatory regime, has tried to deal with water quality and potable water, but hasn't been able to meet its own measuring yardstick, if you will.
We're proposing the creation, through legislation, of a first nations infrastructure institute, so the federal government could monetize its own expenditures in capital development and infrastructure. At the same time it would be giving and harnessing the potential of the fiscal transfers that we should be getting.
As an example, right now we're collecting about $110 million in real property tax right across the country on first nations lands. Over those same properties, the federal and provincial governments are collecting $700 million.
We're asking for a change to that policy, so that those monies that are generated within our communities can remain with us and so that we can build ourselves better, business-ready infrastructure and create the business climate that Canada needs and first nations need for pandemic recovery.
2:35 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
I know that sometimes people say that some communities are better positioned, because they're near urban settings or have traffic and development opportunities.
I perceive that the institute would also service rural and remote communities. Could you talk a little bit more about whether that will play any role for the communities that perhaps would be hardest hit?
2:35 p.m.
C.T. (Manny) Jules
One of our advisory committee members is from the far north of Ontario in a fly-in community. They see the need for a national infrastructure institute to be able to work with them to do planning, have training and ultimately have the fiscal resources to manage such projects. One community on its own just doesn't have the resources nor the capacity to be able to operate complex projects such as this. If we can begin to monetize federal expenditures, particularly in far northern communities and remote communities, we will all be better off because we're going to be able to coordinate those projects on a national basis, working with individual first nations.
Right now we're working with the Mi'kmaq water authority, which is made up of about 25 different communities in Nova Scotia. We're also working with the British Columbia health authority. Post pandemic, we will be in a position to be able to build not one health care centre but 20. That's the kind of imagination that we must have. If there's a problem, we should be able to go in with a first nation institution and create the climate where we can have true third party partnerships. Right now the only private-public partnership we have in the country—irony of ironies—is building a provincial jail on the Osoyoos reserve.
One of the priorities that we have is definitely to work with remote communities, to ensure that they have potable water and services that are equivalent to the Canadian standard.
2:35 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
On the land registry, these are not expensive asks, but I think they're very important systemic and structural asks. Can you talk about the land registry, which of course was your fifth recommendation?
December 11th, 2020 / 2:35 p.m.
C.T. (Manny) Jules
Right now, because of COVID, the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs hasn't been able to keep up with the business of registering land transfers, particularly with band leases and what are called “locateee leases”. That's had a direct impact on the business line of individuals as well as band communities.
What I said in my presentation is that there's a $172-billion shortfall in the potential that first nations have. One of the panellists was talking about housing. One of the reasons first nations can't keep up with the housing demand is that the federal government looks at housing as a labiality.
We want to turn that on its head so that individuals are able to monetize and go to the credit markets to build their own home, have equity in their own home and be able to retain the underlying title of our own land. We're not asking that these lands be given up, but that the federal government put in place a mechanism that our ancestors asked for in 1910 to have our own land title system so that we can compete on better terms with the whites, so that we have our own land registry and so that all governments would know that these are our lands.
The biggest problem is that the federal government owns these lands as a result of section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, so the interest is vested in Queen Elizabeth.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay, thank you.
Next we have a six-minute split between Ms. Koutrakis and Mr. Fragiskatos, who will be followed by Mr. Ste-Marie.
Annie, the floor is yours for three minutes.
2:40 p.m.
Liberal
Annie Koutrakis Liberal Vimy, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To save a little time, I will ask Mr. Viau both my questions.
One of the recommendations in your brief is that Canada implement a national standard for zero-emission vehicles.
In your opinion, what regulatory measures and incentives should the government implement to achieve your objective of 100% electric vehicle sales by 2040?
In addition, the Quebec government recently announced that it will ban the sale of gas-powered cars by the beginning of the next decade. Should the federal government consider implementing this nationally? Is this a sustainable measure?
2:40 p.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
Thank you for your questions, Ms. Koutrakis.
On the first question, I think it takes a combination of measures to set up a proper zero-emission vehicle strategy that will reduce not only the emissions of our transportation sector, but also all vehicles in general.
In terms of the electrification of transportation, we can replace gas-powered cars with electric cars, but that doesn't solve the traffic problems. So there needs to be a modal shift to public transit and active transportation. There needs to be infrastructure for active transportation, whether for conventional or electric bicycles. We are not really exploiting this huge potential right now, and we should.
To go back a little, let's say that the new plan announced this morning by the government addresses this issue somewhat. The ZEV standard is part of a regulatory approach that requires manufacturers to make zero-emission vehicles available to consumers under a fairly complex scoring system. I won't go into details. We are seeing that the highest sales of zero-emission vehicles are in British Columbia and Quebec, where this standard is in place. This regulatory part is intended to address the supply issue.
The financial incentives for purchase have been reconfirmed in today's plan. On our end, we are proposing a system of fees or rebates, also known as a “bonus-malus” system, to ensure that the market itself, not the government, pays the fee. Under this system, buyers of more polluting vehicles pay for buyers of less polluting vehicles. That's a principle that we advocate.
So we are talking about a regulatory aspect, a financial incentive and the policies that accompany a modal shift.
Your second question was about the Quebec government, I believe.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Eaton, first of all, thank you for the extraordinary work that you and the organization are doing. I note that the CMHA website says that the goal the organization and you have is to work “with key partners across Canada to reimagine the mental health system in Canada.” That's a direct quote from the vision statement of the group, which is a laudable goal.
How can the federal government help to do that and what does a reimagined mental health care system in Canada look like?
2:45 p.m.
National Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Mental Health Association
It's a big goal, and I think one of the ways we've started to think about it is that we have universal health care but not universal mental health care. What you would find in other G7 nations, with the exception of the United States, is a fully funded mental health care system that includes everything, from the basic sorts of treatments we described in BounceBack for depression and anxiety, all the way to the treatment of major mental illness.
Right now, what we have in Canada is a system that is funded for clinical care. We fund hospitals and psychiatrists, but we don't fund psychologists, psychotherapists, and depression and anxiety care and treatment. We want to see funding for a full cycle of care, the full-step care model, as it's called. The piece that's missing is early intervention for community mental health care.
In the United Kingdom right now, if you're experiencing depression or anxiety, you can go to a community centre and get in-person or virtual care. It's been fantastically successful. It's inexpensive and it takes pressure off the critical care system. That is the kind of investment we would like to see in the longer term.
Where does the federal government come in? We believe there would probably have to be changes to the Canada Health Act, as one step, and there needs to be mechanisms so the federal government can fund the provinces to ensure there is allocation for these other aspects of step care for mental health.
2:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I'm sorry, but we'll have to end it there. Six minutes go fast.
Go ahead, Gabriel.
2:45 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Mr. Chair, you talked about a unanimous motion passed this morning in the House. Before I move to questions, I would like to clarify that it seeks to create a three-digit telephone number, 988, as in the United States, for people who are in psychological distress or who have suicidal thoughts. The motion received the unanimous support of the House.
Unfortunately, this afternoon, we failed to pass a motion that could have received unanimous support. It was an adjournment motion that would have allowed us to continue the work of this committee next week. The Liberal Party and the Conservative Party were unable to agree on a short motion that would have allowed the committees to meet next week and allowed us, the Standing Committee on Finance, to continue our pre-budget consultations. Yesterday, we were told that they were prepared to continue if the House moved forward, but that was not the case, so the committee will not sit until the end of January. That is unfortunate.
However, we still have a very good panel of witnesses to wrap up these pre-budget consultations. So thank you to all the witnesses who are here. Their presentations and answers are very valuable to all of us.
My questions are for you, Mr. Viau. I would like to start with your first recommendation on zero-emission vehicles, which is to have 100% zero-emission vehicle sales by 2040.
How does this recommendation compare to what is being implemented in other countries?
2:45 p.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
I don't have the comparative table in front of me, but I would say that it's around the average. Some countries are much more advanced, such as Norway, which is aiming for 2025. Your colleague Ms. Koutrakis mentioned that Quebec is aiming for 2035. What we particularly like about the Quebec government's announcement of its 2035 target, made after Canada announced its 2040 target, is the healthy competition created between the different jurisdictions, which allows them to raise the bar. If we have the opportunity to see the bar raised in Canada, it will be good news for us.
In my presentation, I also mentioned the City of Montreal's climate action plan, which calls for the creation of a zero-emission area in downtown Montreal in 2030. So we are seeing another administration raise its bar, once again. It's not for its entire territory, but it will force higher levels of government to act.
2:50 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
I found this announcement particularly good.
In terms of climate change, will the creation of this type of area have an impact, or will it be more symbolic? Is the goal to show that this can be done in a contained area and then to expand the area? In other words, is the goal to show that this can be done, or is this type of measure enough to have a concrete impact?
2:50 p.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
This will have a concrete impact in downtown Montreal and on the lives of Montrealers. If this can also be done elsewhere, so much the better. There won't be a global impact. However, each government and each administration must implement increasingly ambitious measures.
2:50 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
In your second recommendation for this area, you said that electric trucks and cargo bicycles, ideally electric, would be needed. Does the technology currently exist, or does it need to keep developing in order to meet these standards by 2030? Where do things stand?
What can the federal government do to support these types of initiatives?
2:50 p.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
The technology will continue to develop. The existing technology is enough to begin the transition. There are several manufacturers, including the Quebec company Lion Electric, which makes trucks for long-distance transportation.
The technology required for electric cargo bicycles already exists as well. However, companies that want to develop zero-emission fleets would need financial assistance. Senior levels of government can step in to help municipalities reduce their carbon footprint in the transportation of goods in urban areas.
Let's also remember the long-distance transportation of goods, which must be addressed. The technology already exists, as I said when I spoke about Lion Electric.
2:50 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Okay. I'll be very quick.
Thank you for all your answers, Mr. Viau.
In terms of your fifth recommendation, which you often talk about, do you have an example of an inefficient fossil fuel subsidy that should be eliminated by 2025?
If not, thank you.
2:50 p.m.
Director, Government Relations, Équiterre
In 2019, there was $600 million in subsidies in Canada.
2:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We'll go to Mr. Julian for a six-minute round, followed by Mr. Poilievre, for a five-minute round.